shutyomouth wrote:You've yet to address the most logical aspect of this all - economics. 'Tardt, AGAIN, what would be the advantage of this all? I know one time you said "NASA!!!". Really? Would the entire rest of the planet be geared towards saving their asses? If what we're on is flat - then so what? We're here, and we have to make do. The distances between two places would all be different than what it's based on now. The costs would be absolutely mind-bending about how it would be to keep the illusion up that the earth is round if it were really flat - and all for really not a big fucking reason (again - we're here regardless). There would be no logic in keeping up an illusion of whether what we're on is flat or round. It really wouldn't be a huge fucking deal.
I have addressed this now multiple times.
You are making assumptions and you have created scenarios in your mind which are, imo, not accurate.
I can say no more to you on this.
If because of this, you are sure your globe is correct, so be it.
Enjoy your globe!
If we're in a sphere, what's on the outside of the sphere? You may call it "nothing", but something has to house all of this.
I assume water is above the firmament.
I don't claim it for a fact, but it is my assumption.
And finally - people had figured out the earth was round waaaaay before NASA. Way before flight. Hell - damned near before money. Are you grasping any of this? Pythagoras was probably the first person that proposed the Earth was round sometime around 500 B.C.. What in Charlie Daniels' fuck would it have made at that point? Have we been keeping this illusion up for over 2500 years?
Where's the logic?
People made theories long ago about the earth being a globe, yes.
But they did not
know it.
When rockets began going up, people could know for sure about the earth.
To paint with a broad brush, those who pushed the idea of the globe were "anti-God."
As I have told you...
If the earth is a random rock flying around in space, and it is one of a near infinite number of such rocks, it is pretty easy to deny a Creator.
But if the earth is flat and enclosed, it is evident that there is a Creator.
Something along these lines has been commonly understood as an earth model for most of human existence.
It is what is presented in the Bible.
The idea is that the earth is flat and stationary.
It is covered by a firmament which contains the sun, moon, and stars.
Waters are above the firmament.
The globe is the more radical idea, for many reasons.
It demands that water behave in ways that we know water does not behave.
It is irrational and frankly stupid.
This has now been pointed out to you many times.
The globe model also goes against what we directly experience.
We experience that we are
flat (basically) and stationary, with the celestial bodies moving in a circuit above us.
It is only in more "recent times" that the globe has become a more (much more) accepted idea.
What you see above is what the majority of people have thought through human history.
